Title: Evaluation of different fungicides for the control of peach scab (Cladosporium Carpophilum), brown rot (Monilinia Fructicola), and Rhizopus Rot (Rhizo
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076525/00001
 Material Information
Title: Evaluation of different fungicides for the control of peach scab (Cladosporium Carpophilum), brown rot (Monilinia Fructicola), and Rhizopus Rot (Rhizo
Physical Description: Book
Creator: Large, John R.
Publisher: Big Bend Horticultural Laboratory, University of Florida
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076525
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 145741568

Full Text




S'-7 BIG BEND HORTICULTURAL LABORATORY
MONTICELLO, Florida

Big Bend Hort. Lab. Mimeo Report BBL 67-9 April 20,1967

EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT FUNGICIDES FOR THE CONTROL OF PEACH SCAB
(CLADOSPORIUM CARPOPHILUM), BROWN ROT (HONILINIA FRUCTICOLA), AND
RHIZOPUS ROT RHIZOPUSS SP.), ON MAYGOLD PEACHES AT Mf -1 ,
IN 1966. R 8- V I
1
by J. L. Large.. L

INTRODUCTION

The production of peaches is a new but rapidly groinia.
The 1964 Dare report states that there are at least 4,000 acres now in young
and non-bearing trees. In 1966 Sharpe (Florida Grower and Rancher, August,
1966) estimated that around 3,500 acres have been planted in Central Florida,
North of the line extending from Brooksville to Sanford; and Young, 1966
(Mimeo Report BBL 66-4) estimated there were 3,953 acres in North Florida,
principally in Madison, Jefferson, Holmes, and Leon counties. With this rapid
growth in commercial production there is a need for research on timing of
applications and testing of fungicides for the control of the following leaf
and post harvest diseases;

1. Brown rot and blossom blight Monil&nia fructicola (Wint.) Honey.
2. Bacterial leaf spot Xanthomonas pruni (E.F.Sm) Dows.
3. Scab Cladosporiur carpophilum (Lev.) Aderh.
4. Rust Tranzschelia discolor (Fckl) Tranz & Litv.
5. Peach leaf curl Taphrinia deformans (Berk.) Tul.
6. Brown rot of fruit Monilinia fructicola (Wint.) Honey.
7. Grey Mold of fruit Rhizopus sps.

METHOD OF PROCEDURE

Maygold peach trees, planted in February 1964, were sprayed with eight
applications with a hand gun using dilute sprays applied at 450 P.S.I. The
first was a dormant spray of liquid lime sulphur, 5 gal/100 gallons of water
applied just before bud break (March 1). This spray was used in all treat-
ments except the unsprayed check. The dormant spray was followed by fungic-
ide and insecticide spray applications on March 22 (shuck split), April 5,
April 28, May'6, May 12, May 19, and May 24. Malathion 25WP, 3 lbs/100 was
used in dormant and first 3 cover sprays. Guthion 75W, 4 ozs/100 was used in .
the four May applications to control insects.

Ten fungicides with three one-tree replications of each treatment were
used. Botran 75W., 1.2 lb/100 was included in the last three sprays on half
of the trees. Leaf disease counts were made April 4, 19, and May 3rd. The
monthly rainfall was as follows; (1) arch 2.72 inches ;-Api-'L '. 99 6la-LJ
June 1 to 15, 5.72. HUME LIBRARY


b ,AY 3 9357
1 Associate Plant Pathologist

SIFA S. Univ. of Florida


200 cc


I I Ill II








-2-


FUNGICIDES TESTED

The fungicides tested were; Daconil: (2787) 2 lbs/100; Difolitan O0W,
1 Ib, and 1 1/2 lbs/100; Captan 50W, 2 lb/100; Cyprex + Captan 50W, 1/2 lb +
1 1/2 lbs/100; Kolofog, 6 lbs/100; Kolo-100, 6 lb/100; Sulphur, 6 lbs/100;
Polyram 80W, 2 lbs/100; Kocide, 6 lbs/100 (2 applications) then sulphur, 6
lbs/100; Dormant Lime-Sulphur 6 lb/100; and unsprayed trees. Botran 1.2 lbs/
100 was used on half the trees (3) of each treatment in the last 3 applicat- a
ions and for one treatment it was used in 7 applications with Difolitan 80W.

DISCUSSION OF LEAF DISEASES

Blossom blight, Peach leaf curl, bacterial spot, and rust were of minor
importance on sprayed foliage this season. Scab was serious (39% infection)
on unsprayed trees. No scab was found on trees sprayed with Captan 50W, 2
lbs/100, Captan + Botran, 2 lbs + 1.2 lbs/100, Polyram, 2 lbs/100, or Daco-
nil (2787) + Botran, 2 lbs + 1.2 lbs/100. Leaf counts made May 28 to May 30,
indicated that peach leaf curl, bacterial spot, and rust were of minor impo-
rtance on sprayed trees this season. (Table I).

Bacterial spot was most severe on leaves sprayed with Kocide 2 lb/100.
Two applications of this fungicide, which contains copper hydroxide, caused
yellowing and marginal necrosis of the foliage, with 30 to 50% defoliation.
These trees were sprayed with Sulphur 6 lb/100 in the last 6 applications.

CONTROL OF STORAGE DISEASES

Peaches, 30 per tree, (90 per spray treatment) were stored at room
temperature, 70 to 80 degrees F., for 4 and 7 days.

The percentage disease infection after 4 and 7 days are recorded in r
Table II.

The disease infection on the fruit was very light and generally less
than 5 per cent, after 4 days storage at room temperature. The best disease
control after 4 days storage, 100 per cent was obtained with Difolitan 80W.
+ Botran, 1.5 lb. + 1.2 lb/100; Captan 2 lb/100, 98.33 per cent; and Sulphur
6 lb/100 98.34 per cent. The least effective fungicides after 4 days storage
were: Daconil (2787) + Botran, 2 lbs + 1.2 lbs/100; 11.67 per cent and Kolo
100 + Botran, 6 lbs. + 1.2 lbs/100; 15.47 per cent diseased fruit. The
disease on the unsprayed peaches was very light as only 7.58 per cent
brown rot infection developed during these 4 days in storage. The best dis-
ease control after 7 days storage at 70 to 80 degrees F., was obtained with
Captan 50W + Botran, 2 lbs. + 1.2 lbs/100, 85 per cent followed by Difloitan
80W + Botran, 1 lb. + 1.2 lb/100, 84.5 per cent

The addition of Botran in the last three spray applications improved
the effectiveness of Difoliation 80W, Captan and Sulphur in controlling
Rhizopus rot, but did not reduce the brown rot infection. In these tests
Botran reduced the fungicidal effectiveness of Cyprex + Captan. After
7 days in storage Kolofog and Kblo 101 were not as effective as Sulphur
in controlling Brown rot and Rhizopus rot.
















0
Co




C1


a.


0 0o
0 0

3 -
0
r- 3

3

I
t/


o an )>

i- -
o0
o 0



o 0
oD 0C)


0 t< 0 0
o -J -^ -'f -^ .0 -h 0
-I. ^ -o d 0 f+ o 0
0. *1 c -h (D 0 -w S
(D 1 *
C*D 0 0 C 3 .. .
S3 -1 0 Cn -






0 C3



0 00 O 0
Sr%) o w ON M3 I' N)



C 0C

*0 C0D


.-4 -
+ +


-4 -4 --1 -4 --I -


0 -, -i 0 -9 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 -1





0 -- a -4 C- -a 0) -4 -1 --4
I I





0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





0 0 -4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0






-' -I *- w o C -4 -l- O 0 0O --

(71 tn (3


-1

C-f


0 0 --


-- -4 -4 0 -4 -a -4 -4






C --4 -4 0 0 -4 0 0C 0

CA (3


-4

m

-4

m

-4




-0
0
C
r


ia

0
0

o r-





0 3





cn










l 0



C-



L CD
.-.' -ft








0



0




C
U)
c-I-


-4

C0
r-
m





3r-
3 (D

-h




W o


(D




0
U)





0 -'


--h

-(D


-h 0


ct--n












0 --i
00
-p





0
- CD


0








3-



CD>O*

n-I--I











i-a
(S0















0 V4 U

M to A <

Cr -. *D 3- -



fCD r 0


r+ 00
0 tr o.
(-+ -4 CO I 0O
S3 0 -h t+-
)-' 0 .


CA 0. (D
ID o r(D CE
CT nS t-o M

o (D (D
(D ) (D SW c+
CD" n a
=0 00 a
c+ (A =r m
Q0 (D T (D MO

' o 0 rtV =


( D o =X
+- -O CD C+
OC -5 *S r
CD (0 DJ *

(D a (A *S





3 CD
0 CL (D







U 0
0 Q. mD



(D *** 0
IA C+ C +
(A 0


O (D

0fD
0C) (D
SCT cD



"0 0<
O M (D


0D c- Ct+
31 tt>




* *1 U) CD
-4. c i

NC r





O0 -(
C









c -h
o o
C+ CD )
0r -'I.



(D (D
v0 ro
-h C







C <4



CD CD


" -r r_
0O 00.* -4.

C C

0. 0W 0.


S-* cr -o.
(D 4 *
0. (D Co
c+ t





W 4
C CD







.- 0-


o 0

00 r0
0 D -





CO .4 '.0p

OO ..












t 0




OI C> c0






0 03 0
Cr & o>





t *








n o cr


(D


0








*





-1O
Cro)
*C





O
+
- *''


0'
X3


0
S *
ct


s



-'4


0-
'-
31*
CIO
CA).


-h



0*

A p
C- 3
ra **

-- +
73
* 0

I-- +
0 0
0 3


CO


-o



+ -.
0



00



-a

C j

0O



'-4


U
--




*-1

0


-I


1-h
%J 0m 0





00* *
ooCo o


0
C)
0




0C

0




Co
0




O
0









TID
i-*
01



t.-









00
J s'


-0.o -n



0 p0
C0
(D -**



* *1

O c+



-h* (D

-4 t
i o
1 0o


W (0





3-
0



-(DI





Cfl>
co -


0 CD
C + C+
0 (D
cr + 0


Zt aW ro
(D >
Co -J


-1
3: **









00
&0 -J n-





0




b O c--r
V D



"C 0
-' C
;c-n







+ D r+












0a
t3






;0 .
"o r r






ci- N
s O 0
3
W)


-I



m
'-S








CD
r








0**


to
S(D
." "C
"0


C+ -

0





(D
3 -f








V.
Gero





0










(tD
- CD

cat


c+ -


CD
< w*










o
CD
(A

0*




CD
-s




(D
ctD



0

03
0o


CD
"0

-s
rD
rD
wT




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs